mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
the new world disorder
Duterte and Putin Reject ICC

The liberal international order is in bad shape these days, as Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte threatens to withdraw from the International Criminal Court the very day after Russia did so. Reuters:

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte on Thursday said he might follow Russia and withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), citing criticism from Western nations for a rash of killings unleashed by his war on drugs.

Duterte described the ICC as “useless” and expressed frustration about the West’s allegations of extrajudicial killings and its failure to understand his crackdown on narcotics. He also appeared to blame the United Nations for failing to prevent wars all over the world. […]

“They are useless, those in the international criminal (court). They (Russia) withdrew. I might follow. Why? Only the small ones like us are battered,” Duterte said before his departure for Lima to attend an Asia-Pacific summit.

Duterte has rightly been criticized for his reckless outbursts, but in this case he has hit upon a kernel of truth. The ICC is a prime example of an ineffectual institution whose supposed mandate is incommensurate with its enforceable authority. Russia’s withdrawal came after the ICC criticized Russia’s role in Ukraine, which only confirms that major powers consider themselves off-limits to the ICC’s jurisdiction. Duterte’s comments, meanwhile, reflect the growing disdain felt by many smaller countries to such international “rules-based” institutions.

Illiberal countries around the world increasingly treat the West’s heavy-handed moralism with contempt, especially when such judgments come from weak institutions like the ICC. The U.S. can and should take human rights into account when crafting its foreign policy, but it should not pin its hopes on international institutions that lack the means to enforce the values they espouse. As the idea of an international liberal order loses credibility, countries like the Philippines may look toward alternative systems led by Russia and China, which offer no such pretenses about safeguarding human rights.

Features Icon
show comments
  • Jim__L

    “Illiberal countries around the world increasingly treat the West’s
    heavy-handed moralism with contempt, especially when such judgments come
    from weak institutions like the ICC.”

    With our social radicalism, socially conservative countries have lost all respect for our moralism. A uniform sense of justice in the world is a casualty of Progressive “thinking” on “human rights”.

  • FriendlyGoat

    From TAI’s “New World Disorder” section, a suggestion that to “alternative systems led by Russia and China” are where we want the Philippines and similar nations to be going? Yesterday TAI was more or less endorsing this kind of thought for Australia and trade agreements because of recent badmouthing of our own efforts at TPP.

    It’s doubletalk to say ” the U.S. can and should take human rights into account when crafting its foreign policy” while basically having the opposite in mind when shaping the whole purpose and content of articles. That’s kinda like “New Journalism Disorder”.

    Yes, IGO’s are low on enforcement authority by necessity and design so that you can get sovereign states to participate in them. Yes, IGO’s are the main forums for defining human rights standards for the world. No, you don’t abandon their mission when dictatorial types take their marbles and go home.

    • Jim__L

      I’m curious if these two posts were written by the same person, or different people.

      I’d guess the second, but I could be wrong.

      • FriendlyGoat

        Could be different authors, but it’s the same TAI.

        • Jim__L

          Yes…. OK, here’s something VERY VERY important for you to understand.

          FG, it is in fact possible for an organization to have diversity of opinion. I’m not even convinced that the Democrats have really all cloned their entire mental makeup off of the D-side platform, like you seem to have.

          So… at TAI, you’re likely to see different articles with different opinions. This is a sign that people are not entirely mentally ossified. It is a good thing, and should be celebrated.

          • FriendlyGoat

            The question is whether you are edified or not by what is available to read.

  • Either you construct a world executive with a military arm capable of pursuing its enemies, or you don’t get to have a global judiciary. Funny that the same people who oppose the first in any form are those who push so hard for the second. Their project is essentially replacing elected officials with experts at all levels. No big surprise that the electorates everywhere take the ‘global public opinion’ disapproval of their national leaders as a recommendation for the same leaders.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service